[Kretek]

Prop 22 in Calif was a change to the Constitution, not a law to be ruled on my the courts, it is actually the opposite. We told the government how to operate and what laws they can pass.

Yes; I'm curious how an amendment to the Constitution can be un-Constitutional. By definition, amendments are Constitutional as they are the Constitution.

[calcowgirl]

Proposition 22 was not a Constitutional Amendment.

It only changed California's family law code to prohibit recognition of same-sex marriages.

If it had been a Constitional Amendment, the issue would already be dead. See post 42--it looks like there is an effort to initiate a Constitional Amendment now.

[republicofdavis]

Prop 22 was not an amendment to the Constitution, it added a statute to the Family Code. Thus (although in reality it is not) a judge could find it unconstitutional

[goldstategop]

No. It was an amendment to California's Family Code. A state law at variance with the State Constitution CAN be declared unconstitutional. Though I'm at a loss to see how confining marriage between a man and a woman violates any one's rights.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)